IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 36296 of 2009(O)
1. M. SATHI DEVI, D/O. LATE GOPALA MENON,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. VISWA HINEU PARISHAD, KERALA REG. NO.
... Respondent
2. REKHA, D/O. KRISHNA PANICKER, AGED
3. ROHINIE, D/O. KRISHNA PANICKER,
4. RESHMI, D/O. KRISHNA PANICKER,
5. M. SREEDEVI, D/O. KRISHNA MENON,
6. SARALADEVI, D/O. GOPALA MENON, AGED
7. RAJALAKSHMI, D/O. GOPALA MENON,
8. SIVASANKARA MENON, D/O. GOPALA MENON,
9. M. NANDAKUMAR MENON, S/O. GOPALA
10. GOPINATHA MENON, S/O. GOPALA MENON
11. SREE BHUVANESWARI TEMPLE REPRESENTED
For Petitioner :SRI.K.C.CHARLES
For Respondent :SMT.V.B.SANTHINI
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.BHAVADASAN
Dated :07/04/2010
O R D E R
P.BHAVADASAN, J.
-------------------------
W.P (C) No.36296 of 2009
--------------------------
Dated this the 7th April, 2010
J U D G M E N T
In this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India, petitioner seeks to assail Ext.P6
order passed by the court below.
2. Petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S 327/09 before
the Sub Court, Ernakulam. The suit is one for declaration
of properties belong to the plaintiff including the temple
property. Later, it was found that there is one more item
of property which caused the petitioner/plaintiff to file an
amendment application. The amendment sought is for
supplying and incorporating the schedule of the property
to the plaint. The court below feels that by allowing the
amendment, it will change the character of suit and
therefore dismissed the petition.
3. The main prayer sought for in the amendment
application is to incorporate one more item of property
in the plaint and for that purpose plaint need to be
W.P (C) No.36296 of 2009
-2-
amended.
4. Ext.P6 order is misconceived and it has been
passed without application of mind The order is clearly
unsustainable in law. It is not possible to understand the
reason given by the court below in the impugned order.
In the result, petition is allowed and Ext.P6 order is
set aside. The court below is directed to take up Exts.P2
and P4 and pass fresh orders thereon, within two months
from the date of re-opening of the courts after summer
vacation, after hearing both sides and referring to records
before it.
P.BHAVADASAN, JUDGE
ma
A.K.BASHEER & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ.
————————-
M.A.C.A No. of
————————–
Dated this the February/ March, 2010
J U D G M E N T
Basheer,J.
Barkath Ali,J.
A.K.BASHEER,JUDGE
P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JUDGE
ma
